A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steep roadsRise over run, same as everyone else?
in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
Jeff Gaines wrote:
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steepRise over run, same as everyone else?
roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steepRise over run, same as everyone else?
roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Jeff Gaines <[email protected]> wrote:
I think 100% in 'hill parlance' is 45 degrees. It's what (used to be)
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steep roads in >> America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it looked
steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I misunderstood how
the Americans do it?
also called "1 in 1", i.e. 1 unit along and one unit up.
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steep roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I misunderstood how
the Americans do it?
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steep roads
in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
On 01/07/2025 06:09 PM, Chris Green wrote:
Jeff Gaines <[email protected]> wrote:
I think 100% in 'hill parlance' is 45 degrees. It's what (used to be)
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steep roads in >> America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it looked >> steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I misunderstood how
the Americans do it?
also called "1 in 1", i.e. 1 unit along and one unit up.
Would 100 feet along the rise take you as far along the road as 100 feet along the flat?
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steepRise over run, same as everyone else?
roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
NY <[email protected]> wrote:
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking aboutRise over run, same as everyone else?
steep roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although
it looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
If it was hypotenuse, a 1 in 1 would be an equilateral triangle so a
60 degree slope. I don't think that's what is usually meant.
For most non-vertiginous slopes the difference between base and
hypotenuse isn't that significant, but it is when they get steep.
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steepRise over run, same as everyone else?
roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
NY <[email protected]> wrote:
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steepRise over run, same as everyone else?
roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
If it was hypotenuse, a 1 in 1 would be an equilateral triangle so a 60 degree
slope. I don't think that's what is usually meant.
For most non-vertiginous slopes the difference between base and hypotenuse isn't that significant, but it is when they get steep.
Theo
On 01 Jul 2025 21:08:12 +0100 (BST)
Theo <[email protected]> wrote:
NY <[email protected]> wrote:Interesting, I've always understood it to be height risen per unit
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking aboutRise over run, same as everyone else?
steep roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although
it looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
If it was hypotenuse, a 1 in 1 would be an equilateral triangle so a
60 degree slope. I don't think that's what is usually meant.
For most non-vertiginous slopes the difference between base and
hypotenuse isn't that significant, but it is when they get steep.
distance travelled. Many hills are curved, making actual horizontal
distance tricky to measure, whereas distance travelled is easy.
On 02/07/2025 08:39, Joe wrote:
On 01 Jul 2025 21:08:12 +0100 (BST)
Theo <[email protected]> wrote:
NY <[email protected]> wrote:Interesting, I've always understood it to be height risen per unit
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking aboutRise over run, same as everyone else?
steep roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although
it looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I >>>>>>> misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
If it was hypotenuse, a 1 in 1 would be an equilateral triangle so a
60 degree slope. I don't think that's what is usually meant.
For most non-vertiginous slopes the difference between base and
hypotenuse isn't that significant, but it is when they get steep.
distance travelled. Many hills are curved, making actual horizontal
distance tricky to measure, whereas distance travelled is easy.
In an attempt to clarify this I found this in wiki. Not always
authoritative:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(slope)
Which says it is the tangent that is used technically
I am not sure that road builders would bother to convert from tape along
the road to height difference...
But yes, a 'one in one' slope is 45° not 90°. :-)
Apologies
On 02/07/2025 09:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/07/2025 08:39, Joe wrote:
On 01 Jul 2025 21:08:12 +0100 (BST)
Theo <[email protected]> wrote:
NY <[email protected]> wrote:Interesting, I've always understood it to be height risen per unit
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking aboutRise over run, same as everyone else?
steep roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although >>>>>>>> it looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I >>>>>>>> misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
If it was hypotenuse, a 1 in 1 would be an equilateral triangle so a
60 degree slope. I don't think that's what is usually meant.
For most non-vertiginous slopes the difference between base and
hypotenuse isn't that significant, but it is when they get steep.
distance travelled. Many hills are curved, making actual horizontal
distance tricky to measure, whereas distance travelled is easy.
In an attempt to clarify this I found this in wiki. Not always
authoritative:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(slope)
Which says it is the tangent that is used technically
I am not sure that road builders would bother to convert from tape along
the road to height difference...
But yes, a 'one in one' slope is 45° not 90°. :-)
Apologies
I was just about to post a reply quoting that wiki! If you look at <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(slope)#Nomenclature>, at point 4
it states:
"as a ratio of one part rise to so many parts run. For example, a slope
that has a rise of 5 feet for every 1000 feet of run would have a slope
ratio of 1 in 200. (The word in is normally used rather than the
mathematical ratio notation of e.g. 1:200.) This is generally the method
used to describe railway grades in Australia and the UK. It is used for
roads in Hong Kong, and was used for roads in the UK until the 1970s."
So, in effect, it means sine rather than tangent - but it's one of the
points that has no reference stated! It also doesn't make clear what
happened after the 1970s.
FWIW, I think that Joe's reply makes sense a lot more than a direct
tangent or sine. It's why zigzag roads (and pedestrian paths up cliffs) exist. A line-of-sight tangent or sine is meaningless, but a 1 in 8
slope over the full distance is clear.
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues. Woe
betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a,0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-BBAB
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprising
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method
of transport, but: <https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-pyrenees/>
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues. Woe betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a,0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-BBAB
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
On 02/07/2025 08:39, Joe wrote:
On 01 Jul 2025 21:08:12 +0100 (BST)
Theo <[email protected]> wrote:
NY <[email protected]> wrote:Interesting, I've always understood it to be height risen per unit
On 01/07/2025 18:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/07/2025 16:58, Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:Uk is rise over road length. Traditionally
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking aboutRise over run, same as everyone else?
steep roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although
it looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I >>>>>> misunderstood how the Americans do it?
so 100% = 45°, 50% = 22.5° etc
Is it? I always thought it was perpendicular over base, not
perpendicular over hypotenuse. Have I been wrong all these years?
If it was hypotenuse, a 1 in 1 would be an equilateral triangle so
a 60 degree slope. I don't think that's what is usually meant.
For most non-vertiginous slopes the difference between base and
hypotenuse isn't that significant, but it is when they get steep.
distance travelled. Many hills are curved, making actual horizontal distance tricky to measure, whereas distance travelled is easy.
In an attempt to clarify this I found this in wiki. Not always authoritative:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(slope)
Which says it is the tangent that is used technically
I am not sure that road builders would bother to convert from tape
along the road to height difference...
But yes, a 'one in one' slope is 45° not 90°. :-)
Apologies
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:BBAB
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues.
Woe betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a, 0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/ data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprising
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method
of transport, but:
<https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-pyrenees/
Surrey spans the scarp slope of the North Downs - which that is as well
as bits of the weald.
I used to cycle down that and end up in Guildford...Wish I were that fit today...
On one slope I overtook a van glanced in at his speedo and it said
35mph...
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steep roads
in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
On Wed, 02 Jul 2025 10:43:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/ data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues.
Woe betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a,
BBAB
Surrey spans the scarp slope of the North Downs - which that is as well
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprising
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method
of transport, but:
<https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-pyrenees/
as bits of the weald.
I used to cycle down that and end up in Guildford...Wish I were that fit
today...
On one slope I overtook a van glanced in at his speedo and it said
35mph...
I wonder what the *real* safe top speed on a "regular" bike is.
Whatever it is, 35mph seems over it.
Quite apart from the fact that at that speed the brakes are merely a suggestion, just hitting the slightest bump in the road could throw the thing.
Rather you than me, as they say. (Despite having done pretty similar in
my youth :) )
n my teens when my mate and I would often go 40 - 50 mile trips for trainspotting there was one fairly straight hill, not particularly
steep but long. My mate had a speedometer on his bike (I only had one
of those peg things that clocked up the mileometer). There was one
occasion when there was zero traffic around and we belted down this
hill as fast as our legs could keep up with the pedals and he told me
his speedo read 50mph. It was hairy, no helmets in those days, fun
but we didn't do it again.
On 02/07/2025 11:45, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jul 2025 10:43:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Not unless you swerve.
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues. >>>>> Woe betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a,
data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-
BBAB
Surrey spans the scarp slope of the North Downs - which that is as well
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprising
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method >>>> of transport, but:
<https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-pyrenees/ >>>
as bits of the weald.
I used to cycle down that and end up in Guildford...Wish I were that fit >>> today...
On one slope I overtook a van glanced in at his speedo and it said
35mph...
I wonder what the *real* safe top speed on a "regular" bike is.
Whatever it is, 35mph seems over it.
Quite apart from the fact that at that speed the brakes are merely a
suggestion, just hitting the slightest bump in the road could throw the
thing.
Bikes are very stable at speed. So long as you don't panic and try anbd
do the impossible
Rather you than me, as they say. (Despite having done pretty similar in
my youth :) )
I think most cyclists would be ok at 45mph. Maybe 50mph on a bike with
decent brakes
But obviously you don't do those speeds where tight bends are
anticipated. Although in my case I did brake hard after overtaking for
the bend and T junction at the end, which I took at about 25mph
You really can get up to quite decent speeds on a halfway decent bike on
a hill...
On Wed, 02 Jul 2025 10:43:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues.
Woe betide you if you missed a gear change...
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Surrey spans the scarp slope of the North Downs - which that is as well
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues. Woe >>> betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a,0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-BBAB
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprising
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method
of transport, but:
<https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-pyrenees/>
as bits of the weald.
I used to cycle down that and end up in Guildford...Wish I were that fit today...
On one slope I overtook a van glanced in at his speedo and it said 35mph...
On 02/07/2025 10:43 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Surrey spans the scarp slope of the North Downs - which that is as well
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues.
Woe
betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a,0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-BBAB
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprising
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method
of transport, but:
<https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-pyrenees/> >>>
as bits of the weald.
I used to cycle down that and end up in Guildford...Wish I were that fit
today...
The Hog's Back?
Or A25 east of Guildford?
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprisingSurrey spans the scarp slope of the North Downs - which that is as well
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method >>>> of transport, but:
<https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-
pyrenees/>
as bits of the weald.
I used to cycle down that and end up in Guildford...Wish I were that fit >>> today...
The Hog's Back?
Or A25 east of Guildford?
well I didn't like the A25 so I crossed it and used the back roads to Guildford
I'd come back along the A246 or retrace my steps. Depending how fit I felt.
On 02/07/2025 15:17, JNugent wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:43 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Surrey spans the scarp slope of the North Downs - which that is as well
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some
issues. Woe
betide you if you missed a gear change...
https://earth.google.com/web/@51.23103601,-0.46670278,178.94200534a,0d,60y,299.11148182h,80.7058441t,0r/data=CgRCAggBIhoKFkxtMHg4el9pVFhySldkZHI0OThQU1EQAjIpCicKJQohMXdPU1NHNklyNXQxLTJTNGpBT3pmSS01UFktSkZXdXZGIAE6AwoBMEICCABKCAi7mvu-BBAB
It's not even marked with a gradient sign these days
It's many years since I've been on that bit of road! It's surprising
just how many steep roads there are in Surrey. Not my favourite method >>>> of transport, but:
<https://www.broleur.com/top-10-toughest-climbs-in-the-surrey-pyrenees/> >>>>
as bits of the weald.
I used to cycle down that and end up in Guildford...Wish I were that fit >>> today...
The Hog's Back?
Or A25 east of Guildford?
well I didn't like the A25 so I crossed it and used the back roads to Guildford
I'd come back along the A246 or retrace my steps. Depending how fit I felt.
On 01/07/2025 16:51, Jeff Gaines wrote:
A video popped up on my Facebook feed earlier talking about steep
roads in America, they seem to measure in percentages.
He said the steepest is 100% and showed an example and although it
looked steep surely a 100% hill would be vertical or have I
misunderstood how the Americans do it?
The steepest road in the USA is Waipio Valley Road on the island of
Hawaii. It features sections with grades approaching 45%, making it the steepest rural road in the United States.
The steepest gradient road in the UK is Ffordd Pen Llech in Harlech,
Wales, with a maximum gradient of 37.45%, according to Guinness World
Records
There are a few killer hills near me in North Yorkshire: Rosedale
Chimney Bank, a road out of Littlebeck towards Blue Bank, Blue Bank
itself. 1:3 or 1:4. I met a cyclist coming down Rosedale Chimney as I
was going up it, and he looked to be struggling to control the bike and nearly came off on one of the hairpin bends.
On 02/07/2025 11:45, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jul 2025 10:43:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues. >>>>> Woe betide you if you missed a gear change...
Ha ha! Attending secondary school involved two 1 mile walks and a bus
ride:-(
Cycling was much better although wet weather capes and icy roads were a >drawback in Winter.
Come Spring, the bike mudguards came off and the derailleur gears
changed for a fixed 52 front and 12 tooth rear. I never measured actual
road speeds but following the local bus in the rear suction zone was easy:-)
On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 14:46:19 +0100, Timatmarford <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 02/07/2025 11:45, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jul 2025 10:43:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:25, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 02/07/2025 10:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There is a bit of road that used to give the family car some issues. >>>>>> Woe betide you if you missed a gear change...
Ha ha! Attending secondary school involved two 1 mile walks and a bus
ride:-(
Cycling was much better although wet weather capes and icy roads were a
drawback in Winter.
Come Spring, the bike mudguards came off and the derailleur gears
changed for a fixed 52 front and 12 tooth rear. I never measured actual
road speeds but following the local bus in the rear suction zone was easy:-) >>
Smiley, you too. My Dad used to encourage the fixed, which was on the
other end of the axle so just turn the wheel around but I don't think
he would have approved of making use of the suction zone. I recall
one bus driver stopping where there wasn't a stop and I presumed to
tick me off but I went around the other side of the bus and then took
a non-bus route for the rest of the way.
Trolley buses were useless - away far too fast, fixed or derailler
made no difference.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 29:42:21 |
| Calls: | 12,108 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 15,006 |
| Messages: | 6,518,245 |